British series approach?

Discussion in 'Future of Trek' started by Crazyewok, Jun 10, 2013.

  1. Crazyewok

    Crazyewok Commander Red Shirt

    Joined:
    May 19, 2013

    It why im with the "mixed" approach.

    I think the 4th seires (minus the final episode) of ENT had it nailed down pretty well.
     
  2. BennieGamali

    BennieGamali Commander Red Shirt

    Joined:
    May 22, 2013
    Location:
    Norway.
    Please no. I love the sounds of ST even if they are noisy. I hate the noises of Dr.Who.. both their noises would make me explode in a wild rage that would be terrible to behold. (Sorry to all the Whodians whomight have been offended by this! I don't hate the show)

    A British ST would be interesting though. Not sure about the short season thing.. I would love another TNG.. I would love for TNG to come back.. Mmmm TNG..
     
  3. Belz...

    Belz... Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    May 19, 2013
    Location:
    In a finely-crafted cosmos... of my own making.
    I think it was the best balance in any Trek series. Brilliant, and quite unfortunate that we didn't get a 5th season.
     
  4. C.E. Evans

    C.E. Evans Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2001
    Location:
    Ferguson, Missouri, USA
    CBS itself would be the last place a new Trek series would ever be. It's the #1 US TV network with shows that are cheaper, easier to produce, and have broader appeal (bigger audience) than Trek does.
     
  5. T'Girl

    T'Girl Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2009
    Location:
    T'Girl
    Probably the best cross-over we could hope for since Benny Hill is gone.

    Ahh, to have been able to replace the little man Benny was always slapping on the back of the head with Sir Patrick Stewart!

    Alternatives would be for CBS to put Star Trek on cable themselves, or to farm it out to someone else who would.

    :)
     
  6. C.E. Evans

    C.E. Evans Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2001
    Location:
    Ferguson, Missouri, USA
    I kind of doubt that CBS would ever farm a new Trek series out to someone else (I think they'd rather have full control and ownership of their TV properties), but I can definitely see it airing on a cable network, especially if CBS finally got around to getting a cable outlet like the other broadcast networks already have.
     
  7. Iamnotspock

    Iamnotspock Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2008
    Location:
    Bristol, England
    Well, Holmes is intrinsically British. Trek is very much a part of American TV folklore.
     
  8. Shaka Zulu

    Shaka Zulu Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2013
    Location:
    Bulawayo Military Krral
  9. MacLeod

    MacLeod Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2001
    Location:
    Great Britain
    ^I did of course mean on TV.
     
  10. solariabsg25

    solariabsg25 Captain Captain

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2007
    Location:
    Bristol, UK
    Sorry, citizen, I think you meant to say RIGHT show!!

    [​IMG]


    As others have said, a British shorter season won't necessarily work for a US show. Advertising revenue on the commercial channels, isn't a really big issue, hence they're able to do shorter seasons such as crime dramas.

    Then on the other end of the spectrum, you have the soaps that have 3 episodes a week, week-in-week-out, for eons!! Well, decades, it just seems like eons!! :)
     
  11. Cinema Geekly

    Cinema Geekly Commander Red Shirt

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2012
    I assume by the British approach you mean shorter seasons, which I would be all for.

    Don't get me wrong, the more Trek, the better as far as I am concerned.

    That being said all of my favorite TV shows are either on HBO or AMC and they all have shortened seasons and have all been critically acclaimed and they all represent different genres.

    I think Star Trek would be a perfect fit for that style of show. Plus fewer episodes mean larger effects budgets.
     
  12. MacLeod

    MacLeod Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2001
    Location:
    Great Britain
    Fewer episodes doesn't mean more money. Where do people get this idea from?

    i.e. If a show costs say US$4m per episode, then a 20 episode season would have a budget of US$80m, converesly a 10 episode season would have a budget of US$40m
     
  13. AviTrek

    AviTrek Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2006
    It's even worse than that. If a show has a budget of $4m/episode. That gets spent lets say $3m/episode variable costs and $1m/episode amortizing fixed costs. If the show only has 10 episodes, then its budget needs to become either $3m variable plus $2m amortizing fixed or more likely $2m variable and $2m amortizing fixed. So cutting the episode count either forces more to be spent per episode or forces fixed costs to take up a higher portion of the budget and results in even less money for variable costs(ie fx).

    You can argue that cutting the episode count helps creatively, but from a budget perspective it's a disaster.
     
  14. Sindatur

    Sindatur Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2011
    Location:
    Sacramento, CA
    Yup, with more episodes, you can spread the cost of building additional sets CGI Models over more episodes (IE: with 20 episodes, if an additional set or CGI Model is going to cost you $1Million, you can spread that over all 20 episodes, only using up $50K of each episode's budget to build it. If it's spread over 10 episodes, that takes $100K out of each episode's budget)
     
  15. Crazyewok

    Crazyewok Commander Red Shirt

    Joined:
    May 19, 2013

    But if you wanted a larger budget per episode it would be more easy to sell.

    If a low number of high budgetr episodes would pull in far more rateings than loads of low budget episodes then make sense to go for the former.
     
  16. Crazyewok

    Crazyewok Commander Red Shirt

    Joined:
    May 19, 2013
    Worked for game of thrones ;)
     
  17. solariabsg25

    solariabsg25 Captain Captain

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2007
    Location:
    Bristol, UK
    Yes, but that's a specific cable show, like The Sopranos etc, where shorter seasons are the norm (6-13 episodes).

    TPTB if producing a Trek show would want it mainstream and that means the standard 22-26 episode run, like most ABC/CBS dramas, to wring as many advertising $$$ as they can get from it, as they get nothing from people paying a subscription to watch it.

    Trek would also need a lot more money in set-dressing, as whereas something like Game of Thrones can film on location, Trek would by it's nature be unable to get away with Stargate SG1's "Which planet does this Canadian forest represent this week?" attitude. :)
     
  18. Ain Jalut

    Ain Jalut Lieutenant

    Joined:
    May 18, 2013
    Or just put more thought and depth into some episodes and you have the same budget. trek has a lot of thinking man's episodes.
     
  19. MacLeod

    MacLeod Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2001
    Location:
    Great Britain
    Didn't they already try that in ST though with Vasquez Rocks, it represent a lot of planets in it's various appreances TOS, TNG, VOY, ENT, ST (2009),
     
  20. Mr. Adventure

    Mr. Adventure Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2001
    Location:
    Mr. Adventure
    Perhaps Showtime? Isn't it owned by CBS? Has a long history of science fiction shows but hasn't had any in a while, maybe the time is ripe.
     

Share This Page